Legal Opinion
Alegria v. Keeney
Supreme Court of Rhode Island
Decided January 29, 1997No. 95-45-APPEALPublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
LEDERBERG, Justice.
Does the denial of an application to alter wetlands constitute a regulatory taking that requires just compensation? The plaintiff in this case, Richard Alegría, purchased property that he knew contained wetlands subject to regulation under the Freshwater Wetlands Act (Wetlands Act). After his application to develop the property was denied by the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (DEM), the plaintiff brought a claim for inverse condemnation in Superior Court. The trial justice dismissed the action, finding that the plaintiff had knowingly assumed the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. MahonSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Agins v. City of TiburonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Annicelli v. Town of South KingstownSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1983
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Restivo v. LynchSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1998
- State v. WaysSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2004
- Woodland Manor III Associates v. KeeneySupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1998
- Palazzolo v. State Ex Rel. TavaresSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 2000
- Brunelle v. Town of South KingstownSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1997
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.